|
The Australian newspaper, 12th August, 2003.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Lessons on gay marriage
LETTER: I
WRITE in response to Frank Devine's piece "Gay union mere camp comedy
besides true epic marriages", (Features, 11th August).
I have lived continuously with the same male partner for 31 years, the last
27 of those, under the same roof. In that time, the heterosexual neighbours
on either side of us have long since broken up, re-melded their families, or
moved on.
We both work and continue to pay taxes; each at singles rates, I might
remind Frank.
We have never been mendicants on the welfare system.
As former Commonwealth public servants, neither of us has access to the
superannuation of the other, despite a Senate inquiry's recommendations to
the contrary.
For this, we have John Howard to thank.
Cardinal Ratfinger's (sic) document is a series of un-scientifically
unverifiable assertions, not "well-reasoned" as Devine states.
One would have expected better from the cardinal, an inheritor of the
philosophical traditions of Scholasticism, and Thomism.
Where is the syllogism upon syllogism demonstrating the nexus between the
legal recognition of gay unions and the derogation of traditional marriage?
None exists, of course. The Dutch study quoted by Devine to try and
demonstrate the fragility of gay relationships is epidemiologically
meaningless, unless it included a comparison with a similarly-aged cohort of
heterosexual couples.
The US has, as Devine states, the Defence of Marriage Act. America also has
a divorce rate of greater than 50 per cent. Denmark has some (not complete)
legal recognition of same-sex unions; it also has the lowest rate of
heterosexual marriage breakdown in Europe.
Is there a lesson here? Devine warns against the "old Bolshevik trick" of
inevitablism.
Who would have thought, perhaps 50 years ago, that decriminalisation of
homosexual acts would be "inevitable".
– Douglas Clifford
Mount Nasura, WA.
|
|
Some burning issues at stake
Burning
at the stake and stoning to death is no longer permissible in the Catholic
Church. Now instead, it seeks to punish by verbal and psychological methods,
viz in the latest Vatican document issued by the Congregation of the
Doctrine of the Faith in Rome.
Any declarations of pastoral
concern for homosexuals who still hold to their faith seem now hollow
indeed. While this document carefully restates that the Church show
“respect, compassion and sensitivity” to homosexuals, it is peppered with
cruel and abrasive terms, denigrating homosexuals and their lives by
outrageous and ignorant statements.
Where is the respect due to
homosexuals who are living out Christ’s message as they see it? Where is the
respect that should be accorded to Catholic politicians who have to address
moral issues in the political arena?
The Catholic Church is a church
of and for the people. But the hierarchy cannot seem to let go its desire
for governance over the very consciences of its members.
- Jan Coleman
Kew VIC |
